View Single Post
02-19-2013, 02:27 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,759
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by knowsthegame View Post
Why not accept at the positives if we are going to dwell on the negatives.
It's way, way, way too late to look at attendance as a positive. It's completely beside the point.

Originally Posted by knowsthegame View Post
a new prospective owner that can work out a reasonable price tag for the team with the NHL and a sweet deal with the CoG, attendance means everything moving forward.
#1 has never been shown to be a possibility over the past 4 or 5 years.
#2 has been tried and failed

Look, all business plans proposed assumed average attendance to be around 14,000+ every game + substantial help from the city in order to break even. Nobody's ever considered actually making any money in Arizona. That's just not going to happen with hockey. There'll be good years, bad years, and overall you just want to be averaging a zero net loss.

The only upside is an increase in value over time. The only way that's a possibility is for the owner to buy for roughly $ 100 to 130 M (which Hulsizer was pretty much doing by having taxpayers front the rest), and shoot for a $ 170 to $ 200 M sale once the franchise has stabilized. This is the ONLY thing that matters at this point. Period.

zz is offline